We've already seen the Penguins make the necessary adjustments between 03/10 and 03/30 when the allowed 9 goals over 11 games. It's simply a matter of will. They have to stop trying to be the greatest team of all time and just win games through any means necessary.

Desiato wrote:We've already seen the Penguins make the necessary adjustments between 03/10 and 03/30 when the allowed 9 goals over 11 games. It's simply a matter of will. They have to stop trying to be the greatest team of all time and just win games through any means necessary.

Exactly! How many times can we watch guys try to make cutesy little plays and turn the puck over? Seems like it happens every 30 seconds in this series.

That's why I was suggesting a 1-2-2 a few games ago. Slow them down in the neutral zone force them to the boards to the winger and D behind him and the C can curl back to cut off the passing lane as would the opp side wing.

SoCalPenguin wrote:That's why I was suggesting a 1-2-2 a few games ago. Slow them down in the neutral zone force them to the boards to the winger and D behind him and the C can curl back to cut off the passing lane as would the opp side wing.

If they go to a 1-2-2 after getting an early 2 goal lead in game 2, this series is most likely over and there's not a hint of trouble with Fleury. Matt Martin's game tying goal was the beginning of his unravelling, and Cizikas's insurance goal last night was the final straw.

I don't see why you can't bite the bullet and "get boring" in order to serve the purpose of slowing down and winning the series. I don't care how stultifying games 5 and 6 are as long as we win them. Trap the living crap out of the Isles. Left-wing lock them down. Make them fall asleep on the bench.

Winning is exciting. Winning in Nassau in front of the Isles fans is even more exciting. That's all the excitement I want this week.

sniper wrote:The Penguins biggest problem is they can't get out of their zone and through the neutral zone clean. Basically, the Islanders know the Pens breakout and are taking it away. Bylsma and the Penguins however refuse to change their breakout and instead seem to think it's just an execution problem. Well, yeah they probably could execute better, but when the other team knows what you are going to do it makes for a very small margin of error. This results in a ton more turnovers than occurred during the regular season and as a result a major zone time slant to the Islanders side of things.

I think if the Penguins would simply come up with a new breakout, preferably several options to at least keep the Islanders guessing, they would be able to get out of their zone much easier and that alone would solve a ton of their problems. Hopefully starting Vokoun instead of Fleury solves the other big one, which is simply awful goals being given up that aren't earned.

The fact that the Penguins only watched video and didn't practice this morning comes as a bad sign to me. As did their lack of practice before game 4. Seems to me this makes it more likely Bylsma is still trying to show the Penguins that they simply aren't executing the breakout correctly instead of actually changing it. If they were changing the breakout, I'd think they would actually have to practice it...

If they continue to try follow the it's not broken, we just need to execute better philosophy they probably don't win this series and as a result Bylsma will be gone. They change it and I think they start getting a lot more offensive zone time and as a result win this games fairly easily.

Pens had a completely different breakout in game 4

They didn't change it until the 3rd period of game 4. They did change it in the 3rd, but that was after 10 periods of futility and turnovers. I guess bravo to DB for recognizing it after 2 full games and the better part of a 3rd. The "new" breakout was still butt, but it was different.

All I know is that if the Pens manage to get their act together and pull out a win on thursday, I really hope they don't win big. Something like a 5-1 victory is the last thing these overconfident bunch of playoff underachievers need, and IMO, would certainly setup a game 6 letdown. I'd be very happy with a nice solid 2-1 victory with minimal turnovers, good goal tending and sound defensive play.

As far as the whole 'Iginla to the 1st line' argument that keeps coming up, I was originally very adamant about keeping 14-87-09 together, and I still think that probably should be the best option (not taking into account what changes could take place on the 3rd and 4th lines), BUT I would have no problem with them at least giving it a try, mainly b/c we know that Malkins line IS better with Kunitz on there than with anyone else they've tried. To break it down, here is a few of the pros and cons of switching Iginla and Kunitz IMO.

Pros: -Immediately makes the 2nd line better, which more often than not, has been the line that struggles the most. -Iginla and everyone on that line get's to play their natural position, or position they have excelled at. -I don't know if this is necessarily a pro, but as fantastic as the 1st line was during the regular season, I wouldn't say that they've necessarily looked all that great over the past three games. This is as good as time to go ahead and break them up.

Cons: -Even though they haven't looked great lately, 14-87-09 REALLY WAS the best line in hockey during the regular season. I admit that part of my reasoning for wanting to keep them together was a selfish one; they were simply amazing to watch. I remember watching one particular game right before Crosby's broken jaw (maybe against the Jets?) where when those three were on the ice, it looked like men against boys out there. They were flat out dominant. I know people say that Crosby makes everyone better, but at the very least, that's somewhat misleading. He has spent plenty of time playing with both Dupuis and Kunitz in the past, and those two have never played the way they are playing this year. Kunitz and Dupuis are both having the best years of their career, by far. I really think after so much time playing together, that not only have the developed chemistry, but Crosby has made both of these guys better players. I don't think this is the type of situation where you just throw anyone on Crosby's line, and they automatically become better players, at least not to the extent that we have seen with 09 and 14 over the course of this year.

-Also, everyone seems so concerned about putting Iginla on the left side, or alternatively, putting Neal on the left side where he has been less productive. If you move Iginla up to the 1st line, not only are you substituting what was proven chemistry by adding Iginla to a line where has spent little time playing with his linemates, you are also moving Dupuis out of position. I'm not sure why every one is so concerned with having, say, Neal play on the left side, but is perfectly OK moving Dupuis to a side where he hasn't really excelled at, at least not in the way he has this year on the right side. We all know Dupuis can play both sides, but he as been absolutely MONEY playing right wing this year. I mean, it could work. But I just don't get why everyone seems to think this is a no brainer.

-Finally 14-87-09 >>> 14-71-18. Kunitz's numbers this year on the top line absolutely blow away what he was able to do last year on Malkins line. So although we know the 2nd line gets better with Kunitz in there, IMO it has to get a LOT better to offset what you might potentially lose by messing up everything on the 1st line.

With that said, I'm all for at least trying it. It might work out great, and nobody really knows until we get to see it on the ice.

I also fully acknowledge that which line Iginla plays on is the least off the Pens concerns right now. One other change I'd really like to see, that many others have mentioned, is getting JV and TK back out there. Their speed and tenacity is exactly what this team needs right now. To be honest, if Vitale had just a little bit more skill, I would actually like to see him on Malkin's line. The energy he brings on a VERY consistent basis is exactly what that line needs.

Here's the thing, if this team will commit to playing defense, skating and hitting no one except maybe Chicago can beat the. When they don't we lose 6-4 to teams like the islanders.

Bylsma is a one trick pony but his hockey is winning hockey but it is not easy. Maybe with Fleury getting benched will wake the team up in front of him and we can see a couple smothering 2-1 wins to wrap this series up and then continue to see that through June.

There is no reason this team can't win a cup except for them choosing to not play how the coach wants. If they won't then we need a different coach and system.

This is why he is not the man for the long-term - win or lose vs NYI. He was outcoached vs TB. He made zero adjustments vs Philly last yr.

A very strong argument can be made that he was the beneficiary of a very strong defensive-minded structure when he took over the Mike T in 2009 and since he lossened the reings, the playoff results from 2010 to 2012 and the first four games of 2013 have been utterly pathetic. His ego is too big to admit wrong and make adjustments on the fly. I have never cared for him.